If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

Originally Posted by Brutus

Yep. I've been saying this for a few years. The continued emergence of revenue from MLBAM will create an equal playing field as teams are equal partners in the investment. The national contracts will eventually be kept by Major League Baseball primarily, so that money will flow rather evenly as well.

The local revenues will continue to differ, but as MLB has a greater chunk of revenue distribution, baseball will be very healthy.

I'd still like some sort of salary threshold, but the need for it is diminishing by the year.

I remember thinking this was the path to true revenue sharing in 2000? or so when it was announced. Unfortunately, I think that was lost in the archives, but the discussion did resurect a bit later.

In 2000 I was perplexed that people couldn't see this coming and it was roundly ignored then.

Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

I remember thinking this was the path to true revenue sharing in 2000? or so when it was announced. Unfortunately, I think that was lost in the archives, but the discussion did resurect a bit later.

In 2000 I was perplexed that people couldn't see this coming and it was roundly ignored then.

GL

I guess what I'm not getting is why the TV rights - both local and national - keep skyrocketing when it seems more people are watching games via the Internet. Although I suppose you do need someone to broadcast the games in order for people to watch it online but I would think that teams might bypass the TV and put those games online. Then that would mean all revenue gleaned from that is shared equally with all the teams. Perhaps that's why they aren't doing it.

Another question I have, would anyone watch an internet game with no announcers? You still have all the production values and graphics but no announcers. That might be something more attractive to someone on the go who is interested in looking at the game but isn't really into the announcers.

Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

IMO Selig has been fortunate with the boom of technology that he couldn't screw up.

I don't really like Bud, but there's plenty of executives that could've screwed this up.

Another commisioner could've tried yet again to "Break the players union". At least Bud realized it's a lot more profitable for both sides not to have a strike.

The latest draft slot setup was a huge step towards helping parity. A lot harder for a early first round talent to slip to a wealthy team at the bottom of the first round.

Heck, we are seeing a resurgence of many small/medium market teams.
Pittsburg, Cincy, and the Nats are all competitive this year. (Even though Washington is really a large market, they were struggling, and the system helped make them competitive).

Thank you Walt and Bob for going for it in 2010-2014!

Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

Originally Posted by Chip R

Another question I have, would anyone watch an internet game with no announcers? You still have all the production values and graphics but no announcers. That might be something more attractive to someone on the go who is interested in looking at the game but isn't really into the announcers.

I occasionally watch the innings/games muted. (This occurs more frequently when Thom is around.) The announcers generally add very little to the game and some of them (*cough* Thom *cough*) detract from it. I can always rewind (DVR) if I missed something.

What I really want is the ability to select/change my camera angle for the game. Eventually the players will wear cameras as part of their uniforms. I'd say give it another 15-20 years.

Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

Originally Posted by gonelong

I occasionally watch the innings/games muted. (This occurs more frequently when Thom is around.) The announcers generally add very little to the game and some of them (*cough* Thom *cough*) detract from it. I can always rewind (DVR) if I missed something.

What I really want is the ability to select/change my camera angle for the game. Eventually the players will wear cameras as part of their uniforms. I'd say give it another 15-20 years.

Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

Originally Posted by gonelong

I occasionally watch the innings/games muted. (This occurs more frequently when Thom is around.) The announcers generally add very little to the game and some of them (*cough* Thom *cough*) detract from it. I can always rewind (DVR) if I missed something.

What I really want is the ability to select/change my camera angle for the game. Eventually the players will wear cameras as part of their uniforms. I'd say give it another 15-20 years.

GL

What I've been thinking is that eventually you should be able to point your remote - if watching on TV - or touch the screen on a player and the player's stats would pop up. Not all of them, since there are so many, but sort of a line like you would get on Baseball Reference.

Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

Now, with all due respect, I'm not saying this to be confrontational but, in the views of some people, some say that maybe, in certain cases, that because of the circumstances...

"Since I've been with the Reds in 1989, we've never had a farm system this loaded," Bowden said. "If we were the New York Yankees and had unlimited dollars, we could have traded for Colon, (Jeff) Weaver, Rolen, (Cliff) Floyd, (Kenny) Rogers and Finley and gotten them all -- and still held onto our top five prospects. That's an amazing statement."

Re: Financial Windfall for MLB

When ESPN televises a game on Monday or Wednesday, that game will no longer be blacked out in the markets of the two teams. In other words, you can choose to watch the Red Sox on NESN or ESPN on those nights.

In New York and Boston, that’s a pretty significant concession. NESN and YES can’t be too pleased with that.

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most
importantly, enjoy yourselves!

RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball